THIS COMING FROM THE WASHINGTON POST, believe it or not.
http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1569-2000Nov28.html

Burn That Village
By Michael Kelly Wednesday, November 29, 2000; Page A39


For the first time in the Republic's history, the party in power in the
White House, having lost a presidential election, seeks to overturn that

election in the courts. The government of the party in power is
refusing to cooperate in the orderly transfer of power to the winner of
the national election.

A majority of the public now says, in surveys, that it wishes this
stopped; some 60 percent to 70 percent--including, in one poll, a third
of Al Gore's own supporters--say Gore should concede. Instead, Gore
promises to wage a fight in the courts that can only cause immense harm
to democracy, to the presidency and to the country. He must do this, he

says, for the good of democracy, the presidency and the country. He
must burn the village to save it. In virtual lockstep, the leaders and
elders of the party in power stand behind their defeated candidate's
unprecedented defiance of democracy's national edict.

There is one thing you can say about the Clinton-Gore crowd: With them,
there is always some fresh hell and there never is a bottom. No one
could have imagined that they could have topped their most spectacular
first--first elected president to be impeached--or that they could have
created a crisis that would wreak more destruction than that episode.
But with these men of fathomless selfishness, there is always more
damage to be done. There is always another institution, another
principle, another person that must be destroyed--for the greater good
of their greater power.

Mr. Gore, the Selfless One, appeared before "Monday Night Football,"
before the nation to wag his finger and deliver what ranks with Nixon's
Checkers apology as the most revolting speech in political history and
certainly among the most dishonest.

"This is America," preached Gore. "When votes are cast, we count them."

And: "That is all we have asked since Election Day, a complete count of
all the votes cast in Florida." And: "If the people do not in the end
choose me, so be it." And: "This would be over long since, except for
those efforts [of Republicans] to block the process at every turn."

Astonishing. Actually, this would have been over long ago except that
Al Gore refused to accept the results of a fair and full recount that
confirmed his loss, and demanded hand recounts only in selected
Democratic counties; successfully sued to have the seven-day deadline
for recounting extended in a rewriting of Florida election law by a
Democrat-dominated state Supreme Court; successfully lobbied for a
change in Broward County's ballot-judging standards to his benefit; and
still lost--a third time--to Bush.

Of the manual recount, Gore had promised: "I will abide by the result.
I will take no legal action to contest the result."
Of course he was lying and he did not abide by the result; of course he
took the legal action no presidential loser has ever dared employ.

It's worth taking a look at the counting in Broward County, because this

is the reality of Gore's democracy in action.
Under pressure from Gore, Broward County's canvassing board changed its
standards to allow the consideration of ballots where no clear hole is
punched next to a presidential candidate's name. There are three
members of the Broward board: Robert W. Lee, a Democrat and its
chairman; Suzanne N. Gunzburger, another Democrat; and Robert
Rosenberg, a Republican. When these three had finished counting the
dubious ballots, Gore had netted 567 votes.

The New York Times described how it worked. "Time and again," reported
the Times, the Democrat Gunzburger "saw a Gore vote" where the
Republican Rosenberg "saw none.
And time, after time, Judge Lee, a Democrat, cast the deciding
vote--often in Mr. Gore's favor." So there it is--two Democratic
officials steadfastly outvoting one Republican to allot questionable
ballots overwhelmingly to the Democratic candidate. This is the process

Gore depicts as a disinterested effort to count every vote, and may the
best man win. Does it strike you that way?

The worst thing Gore said Monday night was this: "If we ignore the votes

of thousands in Florida in this election, how can you or any American
have confidence that your vote will not be ignored in a future
election?" Yes, if the courts do not give Gore what he wants, then not
only is this election suspect, so are all future elections.

Democrats accuse Republicans of seeking to delegitimize a Gore
presidency. Gore seeks more; if he doesn't get his way he threatens to
delegitimize democracy itself. Got to burn that village down.


© 2000 The Washington Post Company

RWInman